11.20 coming to final

[GCBraun 2,390]

13 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

 And being that I fly online, reading charts and manipulating radios isn't really doable without a lot of hardware.

I fly exclusively online.

Regarding charts (and every 2D window like vPilot), you can pin them to your cockpit and interact with them using touch controls. Regarding radios, you can use the mouse, Touch Controls or Voice Attack. I find VR a much more immersive and realistic environment to fly online as compared to just looking at a desk.

13 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

Theres one more big reason why I don't like it.  It's so lonely. You can't share it with others while you're flying.

I don't understand why people think VR is something that you HAVE to use at ALL times. You can turn it on and off as you please. Use your monitor for some parts of the flight, turn VR on for landing, etc. I don't see this as an issue at all.

[tonywob 4,768]

5 hours ago, GCBraun said:

I don't understand why people think VR is something that you HAVE to use at ALL times

Yep, pretty much how I've been using it. I have other games like Elite Dangerous where I like it now and then because it looks good, but actually just prefer 2D after some time as using VR for me for long periods (30 mins or so) gives me headaches on tiredness.

 

[Silverbird 115]

On 3/14/2018 at 7:32 AM, Boomer said:

Still on the fence about getting XP11...someone talk me into it ... ;-)

Chris you gotta do it man I think you will like it alot. :)

[Silverbird 115]

20 minutes ago, tonywob said:

Yep, pretty much how I've been using it. I have other games like Elite Dangerous where I like it now and then because it looks good, but actually just prefer 2D after some time as using VR for me for long periods (30 mins or so) gives me headaches on tiredness.

 

Same hereTony my eyes suck lol for me its about in hour and I need a break.

[Griphos 138]

6 hours ago, GCBraun said:

I don't understand why people think VR is something that you HAVE to use at ALL times. You can turn it on and off as you please. Use your monitor for some parts of the flight, turn VR on for landing, etc. I don't see this as an issue at all.

I wasn't aware that you could switch back and forth. I’m not sure most people without VR are aware of that possibility. 

However, I’m also not keen on the idea of spending $1000 or more to upgrade my computer (which works just fine for 2D) and another $500 or more for VR just to use it for landings or other short periods when I don’t mind cutting myself off completely from the actual world or it’s not otherwise too inconvenient.

And using something like voice attack seems to me to be trading one kind of realism we have now for a different kind of realism or immersion.

I'm just not seeing the appeal for what is, in some ways, just a poor implementation of a full surround but otherwise inferior monitor. 

[GCBraun 2,390]

22 minutes ago, Griphos said:

I'm just not seeing the appeal for what is, in some ways, just a poor implementation of a full surround but otherwise inferior monitor. 

The appeal is that your are there, sitting on the flight-deck. It realizes something that we as aviation hobbyists have been pursuing for decades. And that for a fraction of the cost of a home cockpit (that also have multiple limitations, inc. being restricted to one type of aircraft).

Of course VR technology can get better, and it is getting better! But calling a "poor implementation of  full surround" is just not realistic, sorry. Perhaps this was true in the 90`s...

Edited March 16, 2018 by GCBraun

[Paraffin 2,197]

40 minutes ago, Griphos said:

I'm just not seeing the appeal for what is, in some ways, just a poor implementation of a full surround but otherwise inferior monitor. 

Here is one way to think about it:

Consider all the time and money that some flight sim enthusiasts spend to build physical cockpit replicas, including large projection screens like the big commercial simulators. It costs a small fortune to do it right, and you're basically modeling just one type of aircraft, or a generic cockpit. People have been doing this for years, but most of us don't have the money, physical space, or dedication to go that far with flight simming.

Now VR comes along, and for a fraction of the cost and no need for a dedicated room in your house, you can virtually sit inside that same cockpit. With a few mouse clicks, you can change that cockpit from a Cessna trainer, to one from a helicopter, an airliner, or a military jet. All modeled with high precision.

One of the big things missing is physical touch, which requires some kludgy workarounds for VR. But we'll eventually get affordable haptic controllers like force feedback gloves, to extend the illusion. 

From my personal perspective and what I'm looking for, the VR hardware isn't quite ready yet. But it's getting very close.

[Griphos 138]

I suppose part of the lack of appeal to me is that I fly in real life, and from what I’ve seen, the VR experience just isn’t closer enough to that to justify the expense. 

And if one of your main arguments is that it’s cheaper than a home cockpit, which very, very few people build, then.....

[GCBraun 2,390]

2 hours ago, Griphos said:

I suppose part of the lack of appeal to me is that I fly in real life, and from what I’ve seen, the VR experience just isn’t closer enough to that to justify the expense. 

And if one of your main arguments is that it’s cheaper than a home cockpit, which very, very few people build, then.....

May I ask what have you seen? Have you actually experimented with VR for more than a couple hours? If so, can you name a better way to train that costs less than 399 USD (the price that I bought my Samsung Odyssey)?

IMHO there is nothing that comes closer to the experience of real life flying for such a low cost.

[Griphos 138]

You may ask.  I've experimented with friends and the demos at the stores.  Not sure I need more than a couple of hours to evaluate.  Why would I?

Train for what?  For real flying?  I would argue that none of our sims, whether 2D or VR are "training" for anything.  The fact that VR puts you in a surround graphical environment doesn't alter anything substantive about its value for "training."  Why would it?  

I'm not trying to argue you out of liking VR.  I'm happy you do.  I still don't see the appeal.  Too many drawbacks for not enough gains.  

And you also need the computer horsepower to run VR, which usually means double or triple that $400-500 investment for the VR hardware.  So, for most people, it's not a simple $400 investment.  

Edited March 16, 2018 by Griphos

[anubhavs 66]

Been following this and I don't understand why non-VR simmers or real-life pilots are against VR sometimes. Its not like someone is taking other options away from them or increase pricing...you can always fly 2D if you'd like.

And of course nothing will come close to real flying. It's not even a question. So lets not compare with real-life. That tends to shut down all arguments. We are simmers here at AVSIM.

Its all about relative simulation experience vs. a 2D monitor and vs. a physical sim cockpit.  And to me personally, I get the sensation of flight in the pit of my stomach when in VR. And nothing can match that other than real life. Yes, there are gripes about resolution etc. but as anyone who has witnessed the recent XP VR Beta releases, the technology is getting better in each release and in fact its easier for me now to manipulate switches with Touch Controllers than with mouse clicks on a 2D monitor.

 Yes - it costs $400 - $500, but the next best simulator option is a physical cockpit which is atleast comparable if not more highly priced!

 

 

 

[Griphos 138]

I'm not "against" VR.  I'm not trying to get rid of it!  I don't understand why you have a problem with me not seeing much if any value in it, at least at its current stage of development.  If you like it, great!  I don't understand why you liking it seems to depend on me liking it too!

And it's a bit odd for you to suggest we not compare it to real flying, when that's exactly what others arguing for it have done, and what you do as well a bit lower in your post.  

Again, I'm not trying to suggest to anyone that likes VR that they are somehow wrong!  So, I'm not sure why some of you are trying to convince me I'm wrong because I really don't see the appeal of it for the reasons I've suggested.  

[anubhavs 66]

1 hour ago, Griphos said:

I'm not "against" VR.  I'm not trying to get rid of it!  I don't understand why you have a problem with me not seeing much if any value in it, at least at its current stage of development.  If you like it, great!  I don't understand why you liking it seems to depend on me liking it too!

And it's a bit odd for you to suggest we not compare it to real flying, when that's exactly what others arguing for it have done, and what you do as well a bit lower in your post.  

Again, I'm not trying to suggest to anyone that likes VR that they are somehow wrong!  So, I'm not sure why some of you are trying to convince me I'm wrong because I really don't see the appeal of it for the reasons I've suggested.  

Well, tbh it seemed like you were trying to rain on others' parade. People here were commenting they are enjoying something and you were dismissing it as you are not a user/don't see value. Totally fine that you don't. Let others enjoy it.

I am not trying to convince you to like it. All I am saying is don't dismiss value that others are getting from it.

With that, let's all say PEACE! :)

[Griphos 138]

I'm not dismissing anything.  I'm participating in an open conversation, and kind of late in its progress at that.  Did you read the whole thread?  It started as a notice that XPlane officially has announced 11.20 is immanent with a nice, brand new ultralight.  Then one person asked to be talked into getting Xplane, and many people chimed in on its strengths and weaknesses, and then it became a discussion largely about the value of VR for a page or so, with several people offering reasons they like it or don't.  I forgot that the thread didn't start with the request to be talked into Xplane and so thought the VR focus was a bit off topic.  Then I looked again and saw my mistake.  Silly me.  I thought it was okay then for me to offer my perspective on VR as well.  My bad.  

I guess what you're saying is that if anyone is talking about anything on this forum, we can either agree with them that whatever it is is just dandy, or keep quiet.  

[GCBraun 2,390]

15 hours ago, Griphos said:

Train for what?  For real flying? 

Yes! What else??. Lockheed Martin, Laminar Research and Aerosoft already stated that VR is about to become the standard for LOW-END training. Please notice LOW-END! Of course HIGH-END training is conducted either on an aircraft or on a Level-D simulator.

Edited March 17, 2018 by GCBraun